MESSAGE:Vote No on HJR CC, an application for an Article V Constitutional Convention of the States supposedly for a Balanced Budget Amendment. Article V does not limit a convention to one subject but states, “for proposing Amendments” in the plural. There is no way to limit an Article V Convention.Michigan gets 33.74% of its state budget from the Federal Government. If Michigan really wants the federal government to balance the federal budget then Michigan should send back all federal money coming into Michigan. Are you as a Legislator willing to refuse the federal money and mandates? Unless you are, an application for a Constitutional Convention for a balanced budget is a sham. (or write your own message) More info below.

If you are willing to Testify CONTACT:Committee Clerk: Malika Abdul-Basir. 517-373-7256 mabdul@house.mi.govTell her you are against HJR CC and would like to testify OR if you can’t go to the hearing: ask that your message opposing HJR CC be given to all members of the Committee for Financial Liability Reform.

Article V of the U.S. Constitution: “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress…” Notice that Congress Calls the Convention and will set the rules…not the States.

Question: Why do we think that the Congress that ignores the Constitution now would be any more likely to abide by a new amendment to the Constitution?

This lists the percentages of state budgets coming from the Federal Government. Highest Mississippi: 45.35% to Alaska 19.97%. This is why a Balanced Budget Amendment won’t work, because the Legislators, conservative or not, will not vote to reject federal funds and mandates.

A Convention cannot be Limited: Former Chief Justice Warren Burger stated: “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could mike its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda…”

Convention of the States, Article V Convention or a Constitutional Convention

By any other names are still the same Convention

By Janine Hansen & Gayle Ruzicka

Article V: “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress…”

All we knowabout an Article V Convention is what we read in Article V in the Constitution because there is no other law or court decision that sheds any light on the unanswered questions.

Only Congress has the power to call the Convention, to decide which applications are valid and to make the rules. Any rules passed by the states regarding delegate limitation can simply be ignored by Congress just like they ignore the Constitution and the rules now.

Consider the importance of just some of the critical rules the Congress will determine regarding an Article V Constitutional Convention:

When and where will a Convention be held?

How many delegates will each state receive?

How many votes will each state receive? One vote per state like the original Constitutional Convention or will delegates be apportioned by population, like Congress, giving large states 55 votes and the smallest states 3 votes.

Will the delegates be elected or appointed by Congress, the State Legislature, or political parties?

Will delegates be elected by the people?

Will Governors, who will assume they should represent their states, be delegates?

How will the President of the Convention, who will rule the Convention with his gavel, be chosen?

Will members of Congress write themselves into the Convention rules as delegates?

Would it be wise or possible to hold the Convention in secret like the original convention to minimize the power of the media?

Only arrogance would lead us to believe that if we cannot control our local city and county governments, State Legislature or Congressional Delegation now, that we would have the political power to control an Article VConvention for proposing Amendments (in the plural). The Article V Convention would be the target of every special interest group, liberal, conservative, socialist, radical or extreme in the country.

Mark Levin’s book, The Liberty Amendments, promotes ten separate amendments. Who is foolish enough to believe the Left won’t have their own ten amendments? The Move to Amendorganization, financed by George Soros, seeks to squelch free speech by prohibiting personal, individual, party or corporate contributions to political campaigns. The Hawaiian House of Representatives in 2012 passed an application for an Article V Convention to add Obamacare to the Constitution and abolish the Electoral College.

Is it worth the risk? Do you trust the people…they elected Obamatwice? Do you trust the government? Do you trust your State Legislature? Do you trust the California or Massachusetts or Hawaii State Legislatures? Do you trust Congress? Do you trust any of these to take our U.S. Constitution into an Article V Convention?

The tumultuous and corrupt political climatein which we find ourselves leaves an Article V Convention vulnerable to unscrupulous and powerful forces. As a major proponent Rob Natelson’s arguments for an Article V Convention are conjectures. Nobody really knows what will happen. We cannot rely on the idea that states would not support harmful amendments passed by the convention, especially in chaotic times. After all, the states passed the 16th (Income Tax) and 17th (Direct Election of Senators) Amendments. What do you think will happen to the Second Amendment…the Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

“It’s so bad…we have to do something” is the argument in favor of an Article V Convention. Is that true? No. If our conservative/Republican state Legislators were willing to reject federal mandates and federal money we would have the power to restore federalism and the Constitutional division of power…but they are not willing to take the political risks of rejecting federal money and mandates. If our conservative/Republican Legislators would embrace nullification of unconstitutional federal mandates like Jefferson and Madison did, we could begin to turn the tide returning to Constitutional government.